Wednesday, February 24, 2016

"The King James Only Controversy" by Trevin Wax

In red font is an article called "The King James Only Controversy" by Trevin Wax. My refutation is in brackets. --Eli Caldwell

"The King James Only Controversy" by Trevin Wax

Occasionally, someone will ask me what I think about the King James
Only controversy raging in some of the fundamentalist circles of
independent Baptist life. Having grown up around many KJV-Onlyers, I
can only express sadness that the conservative independent Baptists
continue to separate from each other over unimportant matters.

[Unimportant matters? You do not believe that the issue of where is the word of God today is an important issue? No Bible believing Christian would ever say such a thing. You are disgusting at best.]The fundamentalist movement is cocooning itself into a safe web of
tradition that will eventually squeeze the very life out of it. It used
to be that independent Baptists separated themselves from other
Christians over important doctrines, such as the virgin birth of Christ
or the inspiration of the Scriptures. Today, the independents
are separating, even among themselves, over issues such as
Bible translations, music style, and dress.

[First of all, the KJB is not just a Baptist issue. The Grace Movement is largely KJB Only, and there are even KJB Only Seventh Day Adventists, Pentecostals, Campbellites, and others. Number 2, the inspiration of Scripture is what we are talking about! The issue is do we have the inspired word of God today or is the Bible only a dead book? I believe the KJB is the inspired word of God, YOU believe it is a dead book. Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. (1 Pet. 1:23) The Bible is the central issue for all Christians, without it, we wouldn't even have Christianity.] Rising to the forefront of the fundamentalist squabbles is the King James Only controversy. Some groups are claiming that this is the hill on which to die, the main issue by which to tell a fundamentalist from a liberal.

[It is. A fundamentalist wants to grow by the word of God (1 Pet. 2:2), a liberal like yourself does not even believe in the holiness and purity of the word of God. You believe that the inspired word of God is nowhere on the earth right now, therefore you are most likely not a Christian. You do not profess to have the words of eternal life (John 5:39, 6:68, 2 Tim. 3:15-17).]

So what is it anyway? The King James Only controversy is essentially a
conspiracy theory that claims that all modern translations of Scripture
are based on tainted manuscripts and that their translators are driven
by a liberal Protestant or Roman Catholic (or even one-world government)
agenda. This theory manifests itself in various forms, some of which
are more extreme than others.

[Wrong again. King James Onlyism is the belief that the pure words of God have been preserved through the centuries and that we have an English copy of it in the King James Bible. We believe that the King James Bible is the inspired word of God without error and that there are "many" corruptions out there (2 Cor. 2:17). We believe that the modern versions are inspired by Satan because they attack Christ as Lord, God, and Savior. (among dozens of other problems) You liberals do not even acknowledge that Satan seeks to corrupt the word of God!]KJV Only Arguments1. The King James Version is based on the “Majority Text”
over against the modern versions that are based on the corrupt
“Alexandrian Texts.”Response: Most of the Byzantine texts used by the King James
translators come from the 11th and 12th centuries. We have since
discovered many older and more reliable manuscripts, which are closer to
the original writings of the Bible authors. By comparing the earlier
manuscripts to the later ones, we can see how the flourishes and
additions of scribes can corrupt a text over time, leading us to believe
that many of the “Alexandrian manuscripts” are closer to the originals
and the majority of Byzantine texts altered. If the controversy were
truly a textual issue, one wonders why the Greek scholars in the KJV
camp have not come up with a modern English translation based on the
texts they deem “inspired.” The textual issue is actually a smokescreen
which hides the true reason for rejecting modern versions: any update of
the KJV is considered tampering with God’s Word.

[Mr. Wax, you are operating in total error.

First of all, the KJB translators did not just base the KJB on Byzantine texts. The KJB is from "the original tongues and with former translations diligently compared and revised". The sources used by the translators were plentiful...TRANSLATIONS: the Complutension Polyglot of 1517, the Antwerp Polyglot of 1572, the
writings of Chrysostom (347-407), Martin Luther’s German (1545), John Wycliff’s Bible of 1384, William Tyndale’s
translation of 1525, Myles Coverdale’s of 1535, John Roger’s Matthew’s
translation of 1537, The Great Bible of 1539, Richard Tavener’s of 1539, Geneva of 1560, the Nurnberg Polyglot 1599, the Syriac of
Widmanstadt of 1555, Tremellius of 1559,the Spanish de Reina 1569, de Velara of 1602, the French of d'Etaples 1530; Olivetan 1535; the
Louvain faculty 1550, the Geneva pastors of 1588, the Italian of
Brucioli 1530, the Diodate 1607,the Zurich 1529, Latin versions of Paginus 1528;
Juda 1543; Castalio 1551; Montanus 1572; Tremellius 1579, and the Vulgate. HEBREW: the Soncino
Hebrew text of 1488, Bomberg's of 1516,the Rabbinic Bibles of
Pratensis of 1517, the Ben Chayim of 1525, The Stephanus of 1539, GREEK:Erasmus of 1516, 1519, 1522, 1527 and 1535,Colineaus 1534; Stephanus 1546, 1549, 1550 and 1535; Beza of 1565,
1582, 1588 and 1598. It is also important to note that
they had the Roman Catholic readings found in Vaticanus, Siniaticus,
NIV, NASV, TLB, AMP, etc. in the Rheims-Douai of 1582.

Despite your effort to make King James Onlyism look like a wacko conspiracy theory, the argument has been supported by many highly educated people, such as Dean John Burgon and Dr. Edward Hills.

Get this....EARLY dates do not make a manuscript accurate. There are several things that you MUST know in order to determine the accuracy of a manuscript: WHAT was it copied from, WHO copied it, WHY did they copy it, and WHERE did they copy it? Early/late has absolutely nothing to do with anything.

The NRSV of 1989 put the phrase back into the text at the end of the previous verse.

Luke 24:12:

The
KJV says, “Then arose Peter, and ran unto the sepulchre; and stooping
down, he beheld the linen clothes laid by themselves, and departed,
wondering in himself at that which was come to pass.”

The RSV of 1971 omitted the phrase.

The NRSV of 1989 put the phrase back into the text.

Luke 24:36:

The KJV says, “And saith unto them, Peace be unto you.”

The NASB of 1977 and RSV of 1971 omitted the phrase.

The NASB of 1995 and the NRSV of 1989 put the phrase back into the text.

Luke 24:40:

The KJV says, “And when he had thus spoken, he shewed them his hands and his feet.”

The RSV of 1971 omitted the phrase.

The NRSV of 1989 put the phrase back into the text.

Luke 24:51:

The KJV says, “and carried up into heaven.”

The NASB of 1977 omitted the phrase.

The NASB of 1995 put the phrase back into the text.

Luke 24:52:

The KJV says, “worshipped him.”

The NASB of 1977 and the RSV of 1971 omitted the phrase.

The NASB of 1995 and the NRSV of 1989 put the phrase back into the text.

Romans 15:19:

The KJV says, “spirit of God.”

The NIV of 1984 omitted "of God".

The NIV of 2010 put the phrase back into the text.

1 Corinthians 10:9:

The KJV says not to tempt, “Christ.”

The RSV of 1971 says not to tempt "the Lord".

The NRSV of 1989 goes back to "Christ".

Colossians 3:6:

The KJV says, “on the children of disobedience.”

The NASB of 1977 omitted the phrase.

The NASB of 1995 put the phrase back into the text.

1 Peter 5:2

The KJV says, “taking the oversight thereof.”

The RSV of 1971 omitted the phrase.

The NRSV of 1989 put the phrase back into the text.

2. The modern translations attack the deity of Christ by removing references to his lordship.Response: The Byzantine texts have the additional “Lord” and
“Christ” added to the name of Jesus in many places where the older, more
reliable texts do not. These are most surely the results of ambitious
scribes, seeking to show reverence to the Savior or simply making
mistakes in copying manuscripts. There are many examples where the deity
of Christ is made clearer in modern translations than in the KJV. (Jude 4, Phil. 2:6-7, Acts 16:7, 1 Peter 3:14-15, John 14:14)

[What makes you say that the modern versions are based on "older" and "more reliable"?

This is what you are talking about...

The underlined PHRASES are DELETED in the New International Version. (not counting the entire verses that the NIV omits)

Matthew
6:33 But seek ye first the
kingdom of God,
and his righteousness.

Matthew
8:29 And behold, they cried out
saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus,
thou Son of God?

Matthew
13:36 Then Jesus sent
the multitude away, and went into the house.

Matthew
15:30 And great multitudes came
unto him, having with them those that were lame, blind, dumb, maimed,
and many others, and cast them down at Jesus'
feet; and he healed them.

Matthew
16:20 Then charged he his
disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the
Christ.

Matthew
17:20 And Jesus said
unto them, because of your unbelief,

Matthew
18:2 And Jesus called
a little child unto him.

Matthew
18:11 For the Son of man is
come to save that which was lost.

Matthew
19:17 And he said unto him, Why
callest thou me good? there is none good but one,
that is God.

Matthew
21:12 And Jesus went into the
temple of God and
cast out all them that sold and bought.

Matthew
22:30 For in the resurrection
they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the
angels of God in
heaven.

Matthew
22:32 God is
not the God of the dead, but of the living.

Matthew
23:8 But be not ye called Rabbi:
for one is your Master, even
Christ.

Matthew
24:2 And Jesus said
unto them, See ye not all these things? Verily I say unto you, There
shall not be left here one stone upon another.

Matthew
25:13 Watch therefore, for ye
know neither the day nor the hour wherein
the Son of man cometh.

Matthew
28:6 He is not here: for he is
risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the
Lord lay.

Mark 5:13
And forthwith Jesus gave
them leave.6:33 And the people saw them
departing, and many knew him,
and ran afoot.
thither out of all cities, and outwent them, and came together
unto him.7:27
But Jesus said
unto her, Let the children first be filled.9:24
The father of the child cried out, and
said with tears, Lord.11:10
Blessed be the kingdom of our father David, that
cometh in the name of the Lord.11:14
And Jesus answered
and said unto it, No man eat fruit of thee.11:26 But
if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven
forgive your trespasses.12:27
He is not the God of the dead, but the
God of the living.14:45
and saith, Master, master;
and kissed him.

Luke 2:40
And the child grew, and waxed strong in
spirit.4:4
man shall not live by bread alone, but
by every word of God.4:41
Thou art Christ the
Son of God.7:22 Then Jesus answering
said unto them, Go your way.7:31 And
the Lord said, Whereunto then shall
I liken the men of this generation?9:56 For
the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save
them.9:57 Lord,
I will follow thee whithersoever thou goest.12:31 But
rather seek ye the kingdom of
God.13:25 Lord,
Lord open to us.21:4
For all these have of their abundance cast in unto the offerings of
God.22:31 And
the Lord said, Simon, Simon.23:42
And he said unto Jesus,
Lord, remember me.

John 4:16 Jesus saith
unto her, Go, call thy husband.4:42 and know
that this is indeed the Christ,
the Saviour of the world.4:46 So Jesus came
again into Cana of Galilee.5:30 because I seek
not mine own will, but the will of the Father which
hath sent me.6:39 And this is
the Father's will
which hath sent me.6:69 And we believe
and are sure that thou art that Christ,
the Son of the living
God.8:20 These words spake Jesus in
the treasury.8:29 the Father hath
not left me alone.9:35 Dost thou believe
on the Son of God?16:16
a little while, and ye shall see me, because
I go to the Father.19:38
He came therefore, and took the body of
Jesus.

Acts 2:30 according
to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to
sit on his throne.3:26 Unto you first
God, having raised up his Son
Jesus.4:24
Lord, thou art God.7:30
there appeared to him in the wilderness of Mount Sina an angel of
the Lord.7:32
I am the God of thy fathers, the God of
Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.7:37
A prophet shall the Lord your
God raise up unto you of your brethren like unto me; him shall ye
hear.8:37 And
Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And
he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of
God.9:5-6 And
he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the
Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou
persecutest: It is hard for thee
to kick against the pricks. And he trembling and astonished said,
Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto
him, Arise.9:29 And
he spake boldly in the name of the Lord Jesus.15:11
through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we
shall be saved, even as they.15:18 Known
unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.16:31
Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and
thou shalt be saved.19:4 that they
should believe on him which should come after him, that is,
on Christ Jesus.19:10
so that all they which dwelt in Asia heard the word of the
Lord Jesus.20:21
repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord
Jesus Christ.20:25
among whom I have gone preaching the kingdom of
God.22:16 wash
away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.23:9 let
us not fight against God.

Romans 1:16
For I am not ashamed of the gospel of
Christ.6:11
alive unto God through Jesus Christ our
Lord.8:1
There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ.
Jesus, who walk not after the
flesh, but after the Spirit.14:6
He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and
he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He
that eateth, eateth
to the Lord.15:8
Now I say that Jesus Christ
was a minister of the circumcision.15:19 Through
mighty signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of
God.16:18 For they
that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ.16:24 The
grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.

I
Corinthians 1:14 I
thank God that
I baptized none of you.5:4 In the
name of our Lord Jesus Christ,
when ye are gathered together.5:5
that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.6:20
glorify God in your body and in
your spirit, which are God's.9:1
have I not seen Jesus Christ our
Lord?9:18 Verily that, when I preach the
gospel, I may make the gospel of
Christ without
charge.10:28 for
the earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof.15:47
the second man is the Lord from
heaven.16:22 If any man love not the Lord Jesus
Christ, let him be Anathema.16:23
The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be
with you.

II
Corinthians 4:6
the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.4:10
Always bearing about in the body the dying of the
Lord Jesus.5:18
hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ.10:7
that, as he is Christ's,
even so are we Christ's.11:31 The God and Father
of our Lord
Jesus Christ.

Galatians 3:17
the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in
Christ.4:7
heir of God through
Christ.6:15
For in Christ Jesus neither
circumcision availeth any thing.6:17 I
bear in my body the marks of the
Lord Jesus.

Ephesians 3:9
God, who created all things by
Jesus Christ.3:14
I bow my knees unto the Father of
our Lord Jesus Christ.5:9
For the fruit of the Spirit is
in all goodness.

Philippians 4:13
I can do all things through Christ.

Colossians 1:2
peace, from God our Father and
the Lord Jesus Christ.1:28
that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus.2:2
to the acknowledgment of the mystery of God, and of the Father,
and of Christ.

I
Thessalonians 1:1
peace, from God our Father, and
the Lord Jesus Christ.2:19
in the presence of our Lord Jesus Christ at
his coming?3:11 Now God himself and our
Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ.3:13
at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ with
all his saints.

II
Thessalonians 1:8
that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.1:12
That the name of our Lord Jesus Christ may
be glorified.2:4, so that he as
God sitteth in the temple of
God.

I
Timothy 1:1
and Lord Jesus
Christ, which is our hope.2:7
speak the truth in Christ,
and lie not.3:16 And without controversy
great is the mystery of godliness: God was
manifest in the flesh.5:21 I charge thee
before God, and the Lord Jesus
Christ.

II
Timothy 4:1
I charge thee therefore before God and the
Lord Jesus Christ.4:22
The Lord Jesus Christ be
with thy spirit.

Titus 1:4
from God the Father and the Lord Jesus
Christ our Saviour.

Philemon 6
every good thing which is in you in Christ Jesus.

Hebrews 3:1
the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus.10:9
Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O
God.10:30 I will
recompense, saith the Lord.

I
Peter 1:22
Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through
the Spirit.5:10
who hath called us unto his eternal glory by Christ Jesus.5:14
Peace be with you all that are in Christ Jesus.
Amen.

I
John 1:7
the blood of Jesus Christ his
Son cleanseth us from all sin.3:16 Hereby
perceive we the love of
God.4:3
And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ
is come in the flesh is not of
God.5:7-8 For there are three that bear record
in heaven, the Father, the
Word, and
the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that
bear witness in earth, the Spirit,
and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in
one.5:13 and
that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.

II
John 3
and from the Lord Jesus
Christ.9 He
that abideth in the doctrine of
Christ, he hath both the Father and
the Son.

Jude
4
denying the only Lord God,
and our Lord Jesus Christ.

Revelation 1:8
I am Alpha and Omega, the
beginning and the ending.1:9
the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ and
for the testimony of Jesus Christ.1:11
Saying, I am Alpha and Omega,
the first and the last.5:14 the
four and twenty elders fell down and worshipped him that liveth for
ever and ever.12:17
and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.14:5
they are without fault before
the throne of God.16:5
Thou art righteous, O Lord,
which art, and wast, and shalt be.19:1
glory, and honour, and power, unto the
Lord our God.20:9
and there came down from God
out of heaven, and devoured
them.20:12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand
before God.21:4
And God shall
wipe away all tears from their eyes.22:21 The grace
of our Lord Jesus Christ be
with you all. Amen. ]

3. Heretics, occultists and homosexuals were on the translation committees of modern versions.Response: This is an all-out attack on the character of faithful
believers who have sought to use their linguistic skills in offering an
accurate translation of the Scriptures. The biblical linguist B.F.
Westcott is consistently attacked, due to negligence in confusing him
with the spiritualist W.W. Westcott. If there is anyone whose salvation
should be questioned due to their “fruit,” it would be some of the
extremist KJV Only advocates, whose polemic, vicious rhetoric is not
becoming of a believer in Christ.

[There is too much info on this topic for me to discuss in this post, but see Dr. Gipp's chapter on Wescott and Hort in this ebook version of An Understandable History of the Bible. ] http://samgipp.com/historybook/?page=8.htm4. The modern translations delete verses from the Bible.Response: Based on the older and more reliable manuscripts, the
modern translations have simply sought to reflect what was contained in
the original manuscripts. It is just as serious to add to Scripture, as
it is to take away from Scripture. The starting-point for KJV Only
advocates is that the KJV is the standard to which all other
translations must bow, which is also the position they seek to prove.
Thus, they employ circular reasoning that will not allow them to see any
other position as possibly correct.

[Look at the pot calling the kettle black. You are employing the same "circular reasoning". Your position is that the Alexandrian manuscripts are older and better and they have less verses than the KJB, therefore the KJB added verses. The King James Only position is that the KJB is the pure word of God and the Alexandrian texts have less verses, therefore they omit verses. We are BOTH using that type of reasoning.

As for the KJB being the "standard" to which we compare modern versions, it is an obvious fact that the KJB is the standard. The modern versions compare themselves to the King James Bible when they come out. The RV, ASV, RSV, NIV, NKJV, NASB, etc. ALL compared themselves to the KJB when they came out, admitting that the KJB is the standard that they should compare to.

Further proof that the modern version translators admit that the KJB is the standard is apparent by looking at how they used the KJB verse numbering system!

The KJB in Acts 8:36-38"[36] And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain
water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to
be baptized? [37] And Philip said, If thou believest with all
thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus
Christ is the Son of God. [38] And he commanded the chariot
to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and
the eunuch; and he baptized him."

The NIV in Acts 8:36-38"36 As
they traveled along the road, they came to some water and the eunuch
said, “Look, here is water. What can stand in the way of my being
baptized?”[37]38 And he gave orders to stop the chariot. Then both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water and Philip baptized him." Notice that the NIV omitted Acts 8:37, yet they put the THIRTY-SEVEN mark in the text rather than making verse 38 the new verse 37. They keep the KJB as the standard for which verse is which.]5. The 1611 Authorized Version is the preserved Word of God in English.Response: No one today reads from the 1611 version, which also
included the Apocrypha. The 1769 revision is the most common version of
the King James translation, and this one includes thousands of
differences compared to the original.

[Actually I have a 1611 facsimile and have read it several times. There have been no "revisions" in the KJB, only multiple editions which corrected the printing errors and updated the spelling. That is a proven fact and whole books have been written on that subject. The "thousands of differences" are things like spelling "son" as "sonne". There have been no translational changes whatsoever.

It is disgusting that you try to make it look like the original KJB had the apocryopha in the text--it did NOT. The original KJB had the apocrypha BETWEEN the testaments set aside from "the prophets" and the NT. You are also using a DOUBLE standard because your so called "oldest and best manuscripts" contain the apocrypha WITHIN THE OLD TESTAMENT and Siniacitcus has the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas in the New Testament! Vaticanus adds these books: Maccabees, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Judith, Tobit, Baruch. Siniaticus
adds the epistle of Barnabas and the shepherd of Hermes to the New
Testament and it adds Maccabees, Judith, Tobit, Sirach, and Wisdom to
the Old Testament.

"There have been many printings of the
King James Version (KJV). The first printing was in 1611. Early
printings contained many typographical errors due to printing errors.
Major attempts to standardize the text were conducted in 1629
(Cambridge), 1638 (Cambridge), 1762 (by Dr. F. S. Parris, published by
Cambridge), and 1769 (by Dr. Benjamin Blayney, published by Oxford). The
1769 Oxford edition has updated spelling and grammar and is a
trustworthy edition that is widely used today. Dr. F. H. A. Scrivener
conducted a meticulous standardization of the KJV from 1866 to 1873,
resulting in the 1873 Cambridge edition. The differences between the
1611 edition and the later editions are due to corrections of obvious
printing errors (including words that were accidentally omitted), the
standardization and updating of spelling, and the updating of
punctuation and paragraph marks.

Removal of the Apocrypha

The
Apocrypha was included in early printings of the KJV. The Church of
England, having come out of the Roman Catholic Church, had continued the
practice of including the Apocryphal books in the Bible. However, the
Church of England has a history of disregarding the Apocrypha as
doctrinally instructive scripture. King James himself said, “As to the Apocriphe bookes, I omit them because I am no Papist” (Book I:13, Basilicon Doron). Article 6 of the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion established by the Episcopal Church in the United States of America in 1801,
referring to the Apocrypha, states: "And the other Books (as Hierome
saith) the Church doth read for example of life and instruction of
manners; but yet doth it not apply them to establish any doctrine;" (Thirty-nine Articles of Religion). The modern position of the Church of England affirms the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion,
stating: "The Thirty-nine Articles are agreeable to the Word of God and
may be assented unto with a good conscience by all members of the
Church of England" (The Canons of the Church of England, 6th Ed. (2000), A 2 Of the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion).

There
were many reasons to include the Apocrypha within the pages of the
Bible during the 17th century. Protestants of the time were deeply
engaged in debates with Catholics over doctrine, so Protestant pastors
and theologians were served well by being well-acquainted with the
Apocrypha which formed the basis of several Catholic doctrines. Some
books, such as Maccabees and Sirach, are quoted in the Talmud; so
familiarity with the Apocrypha can be helpful to understand Judaism
during the time of Jesus Christ. The fulfillment of some Old testament
prophecies, such as those in Daniel, can be confirmed by the historical
information in the Apocryphal books such as Maccabees. Despite its
inclusion in the KJV, however, the translators did not consider the
Apocrypha as part of scripture. Whereas Catholic Bibles included the
Apocryphal books mixed with scripture, the KJV separates the Apocryphal
books and labels them with the irreverent generic running head,
“Apocrypha” (which means “obscure”). The Apocrypha is no more inspired
than are other things that might be included in today’s editions of the
Bible, such as study notes, book introductions, devotional tips, etc.
We can just as well say about some study notes that they are to be "read
for example of life and instruction of manners" but not to "establish any doctrine". The Apocrypha is not included in most publications of the KJV today." 6. The modern translations promote a “works-salvation.”Response: Virtually all of today’s cults (excepting the Jehovah’s
Witnesses) prefer the King James version over the rest, including the
Mormons, who also preach a “works-salvation.” Of course, this does not
negate the worth of the King James version, but we could use this
argument if we were to employ the same tactics of the KJV Only crowd.
Compare Revelation 22:14:
Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to
the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.
(KJV) Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they may have the
right to the tree of life and that they may enter the city by the gates.
(ESV) If we were to use the KJV Only logic, we could assume on the
basis of this verse that the King James translators were conspiring to
take us back to the chains of Catholicism, while the ESV translators are
translating faithfully God’s Word. Of course, this would be a
ridiculous assumption, but it is the kind of reasoning that KJV Only
advocates employ. Even John R. Rice, the founder of the (now KJV-Only)
Sword of the Lord admitted in Our God-Breathed Book – The Bible that the KJV renders Revelation 22:14 incorrectly and that the ASV is more accurate here.

[Actually, the KJB is correct there. Works are required for salvation during Daniel's 70th Week (Day of the Lord), which is the audience of Revelation (Rev. 1:10). The ESV says "wash their robes", which is also a work.]7. The newer versions include footnotes which offer different
renderings of certain words or verses. These footnotes confuse the
reader and undermine the doctrine of inspiration.Response: The 1611 King James Version also included thousands of
footnotes which offered different readings for different verses. We
should be grateful for today’s translators, who in the spirit of the
King James tradition, have been intellectually honest when rendering
exceptionally difficult verses about the limits to their knowledge.

[The reason we complain about the footnotes in the modern versions is because those notes suggest that entire verses do not belong in the text, the only reason they leave them in the text is because nobody would buy a Bible that was missing so many verses. Check your NIV, ESV, or NASB at the last twelve verses of Mark or John 8:1-11 and look at the footnotes. The KJB translators were more honest, when they believed a reading was false they didn't put it in the text.]

Conclusion Like with anyone who expounds a conspiracy theory, it is usually
fruitless to try to reason with the KJV Only crowd. One should seek to
prod these brothers and sisters to a correct understanding with love and
patience, realizing that most efforts will be spurned and may turn out
in vain.

[Tell that to James R. White, author of The King James Only Controversy, who gets mad and calls KJB believers a "cult" because they do not agree with him.]